Worlds of Design: Medieval Travel & Scale

We previously established the fundamentals of world-building; with a world’s basic rules down, it’s important to consider how you get around in that world. And travel was very different (read: slower) in a medieval setting.

canterbury-tales-1730722_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

It’s Not That Far…

As explained by Rick Stump in “Modern Minds and Medieval Distances,” there’s a psychological aspect to travel that should be considered when role-playing in a medieval world. There’s an old saying that 100 years is a long time to Americans but not to Europeans, while 100 miles is not far to an American but far for a European. The time or distance doesn’t change, of course, but the perception is quite different.

Maps can also be deceiving. Nowadays in Western countries there are usually paved roads from most anywhere to anywhere. So when you look at a map you think of distance as closely related to the number of inches between two points on the map. But this varies with terrain and especially with technology.

I’m in the early stages of designing a game about the American Civil War (ACW), and of course I knew that the war tended to be divided into eastern and western theaters. The reason is obvious on a certain kind of map, one that shows railroad lines or one that shows the Appalachian Mountains as a barrier, as they were in those days when the railroad lines didn’t go through the mountains. Railroads were the vital method of transportation for ACW armies.

Or look at a map of the Roman Empire. What’s not obvious is that water transportation was much quicker and much cheaper than land transportation, even with the fine Roman road network. So if you just look at the map you get a completely skewed idea of how transportation (and communication) worked.

I once found online an interactive map that showed the weeks of transportation from Rome (it's gone now, but Orbis is similar). You can easily see that it would be quicker to transport something from Rome to southern Spain than from Rome to northern Italy, especially because there are not big north-south running rivers in Italy sort of analogous to the Mississippi River in the United States. River transport was much cheaper than land.

Or is It?

The standard method of transportation in medieval times was walking. Even if you had a cart to carry goods you weren’t going to ride on that cart very much, nor would a cart with solid wooden wheels go very fast. At normal walking speed, which about 3 mph, it takes a heck of a long time to get most anywhere!

Yes, we have examples of forced marches by military units in times before mechanization that are sometimes mind-boggling, as much as 50 miles in 24 hours, though more commonly 20 miles in 24 hours. What you don’t hear about such events is that a lot of soldiers did not get to the end of the march, they dropped out for various reasons or struggled along far behind.

The U.S. Army 30 years ago would periodically send their troops on “12-mile road marches,” carrying about 80 pounds of equipment; that really wore out the guys I knew, who of course weren’t doing it every day, and did not look forward to it. I think the farthest I’ve ever walked in one day was 7 miles, without a backpack, and it sure ruined me for a while (thanks partly to flat feet).

Riding a horse would make this somewhat more comfortable but not much faster. Even when you ride a horse, for a significant part of a long journey you’re walking and leading the horse. Or you won’t end up with much of a horse.

You can see how much difference magical automobiles would make in a medieval world (provided roads are available . . .), let alone something like a magic carpet. We lose some of the sense of wonder such items would invoke in medieval inhabitants because we’re accustomed to modern technology. Even something as simple as a walkie-talkie with good range would be a great wonder in a medieval world, and very useful to military operations or dungeon and wilderness adventures. Splitting the party (which as we all know “you should never do”) would be much safer and more useful with a walkie-talkie set.

Yes, our fantasy characters are tougher than we are, and more inured to drudgery, but we should keep in mind the difference between a non-mechanized society and a modern highly mechanized society, both as players and as world builders.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Von Ether

Legend
Part of that comes from a reasonable desire to be able to run adventures in different settings (arctic, tropical jungle, desert, forest, etc.) and thus requiring all those things to appear on the map. To achieve this the map has to cover a pretty big swath of territory, at least on a north-south axis.

Purely anecdotal, but in my experience new DMs don't even consider putting adventures into other climes until much later. Everything is planned in a temperate clime where the seasons offer pretty much everything but tropical scenarios. The exceptions are when a new GM wants to start their campaign

I've not seen an example from real-world use, but for ordinary people a connectivity map might be more useful than a distance map. Connectivity map: circles for locations, connecting lines with travel time listed. If by river, the line would follow the river, if by sea, the sea, if significant terrain, color the line accordingly.

In listening to an old episode of Ken and Robin Talk About Stuff, before common people and merchants had regular access to maps that's how they did land travel. "Follow the coast for a week and you'll get close to Nearsburg. Use the river, or follow the river for two weeks and you end up in Farsville.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
It sucks a lot of the adventure out of things sometimes.

Um... I disagree.

What results from having poor maps or directions is... wandering around in confusion, frustration, and anxiety. It is not fun or adventurous.

And remember that, in D&D at least, having a map does not mean one does not get lost.

And remember that adventure isn't about wandering around not knowing where you are going, but what you find along the way - if you want adventure during travel, put encounters along the route.
 

Von Ether

Legend


Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
Um... I disagree.

What results from having poor maps or directions is... wandering around in confusion, frustration, and anxiety. It is not fun or adventurous.

And remember that, in D&D at least, having a map does not mean one does not get lost.

And remember that adventure isn't about wandering around not knowing where you are going, but what you find along the way - if you want adventure during travel, put encounters along the route.
I shall disagree in return. Player expectations when in possession of a to-scale map in part come from the map itself. Much like an over-abundance of lore it can have the effect of freezing things in place. It's perfectly possible to play without them, and there are a number of advantages to doing so, not least among which is the ability to provide geographical complications without need to comply with pre-established map details. Most PbtA games work like this, and so do a lot of my D&D games. So disagree away, I guess.

And remember, I am likely have at least as good a grounding in basic adventure construction as you, and it comes across as more than a little condescending to speak to people like they lack any grasp of the the basics. Put encounters along the route of travel?! You don't say. :p
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
I shall disagree in return. Player expectations when in possession of a to-scale map in part come from the map itself. Much like an over-abundance of lore it can have the effect of freezing things in place.

You were talking about "adventure". Now you are talking about uncertainty. You've not shown how failing to know where the bloody town is generates adventure that wouldn't otherwise happen.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
You were talking about "adventure". Now you are talking about uncertainty. You've not shown how failing to know where the bloody town is generates adventure that wouldn't otherwise happen.
I didn't say you don't know where the town is, I'm just saying you don't have a photo-realistic topographic map of the whole countryside between here and there. Blanks on the map generate opportunities, it's not a controversial idea.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
I'm just saying you don't have a photo-realistic topographic map of the whole countryside between here and there.

Then do beware that you're probably arguing against a strawman. The typical gaming map I'm talking about looks like this:

1595096750962.png

Not photorealistic. Not topographic. I'd be interested in seeing the maps you think are removing adventure by their very content.

Blanks on the map generate opportunities, it's not a controversial idea.

See above. You may be arguing against a boogeymap.
 

Von Ether

Legend
The only fellow I know who is avoiding maps in his campaign is running a Greek era game. But the areas are pretty small compared to regular gaming map areas and there are gods and local farmers to talk to. The GM is also pretty experienced, so if the players get frustrated they'll switch it up to get thing moving.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top